ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

In Bradshaw v. Pittsburg Independent School District (2000 U.S. App.), Bradshaw spoke
out against the district and its failure to help her clear her name following an investigation into
the misuse of school funding. Bradshaw’s speech only concerned clearing her name. This was
not a matter of public concern. Moreover, in Woods v. Enlarged City School District (2007 U.S.
Dist.), Woods claimed that her speech against discriminatory practices was used against her. This
speech was judged by the court to be nothing more than personal grievances with a limited
number of individuals that could hardly be seen as discriminatory. Once again, the speech
involved personal matters, not ones of a public concern. Speech surrounding the personal
employment of a school administrator is not protected by the First Amendment.
There were also instances where the school administrators did prevail in First
Amendment litigation. In those instances, the administrator was able to show that the adverse
employment action suffered was in close proximity to the speech they referenced. For the sake of
this category, the researcher is including prevailing party actions that are split, as in most of
those cases the administrator did win on the First Amendment claim but failed on some other
point.
Table 57
First Amendment Claims--Employee Prevailed
Case Year State Action PP
Lewis v. Harrison School Dist. No. 1 1986 AR NR E
Hatcher v. Bd. of Pub. Educ. 1987 GA R SPLIT
Ratliff v. Wellington Exempted Village Schools Bd. of Educ. 1987 OH NR SPLIT
Carrillo v. Rostro 1992 NM NR SPLIT
Peterson v. Minidoka Co. School Dist. 1997 ID T SPLIT
Everson v. Bd. of Educ. of the School Dist. of Highland Park 2005 MI T SPLIT
Fiero v. City of New York 2008 NY R E
387